Apex Color Lab Vs. Cce

Apex Color Lab vs Cce

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Mar 20, 2007

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/45122

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/45122
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Judge: P Das
Decided On: Mar 20, 2007
Subject: Service Tax

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service Tax

Key legal issue: Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Apex Color Lab

Respondent

Cce

Legal References

Reported In: (2007)10STJ27CESTATNew(Delhi)

Excerpt

1. the issue involved in this application is a narrow compass and therefore after granting stay the hearing of the appeal is taken up for disposal. heard both sides and perused the records.2. the learned advocate on behalf of the applicant submits that the commissioner passed the order without giving any opportunity of personal hearing.3. after hearing both the sides and on perusal of the records, it is revealed from the impugned order that a show cause notice dated 21.11.2006 was issued by the commissioner. it appears from the impugned order that the appellant vide reply dated 23.11.2006 received on 24.11.2006 requested to finalise the proceedings under amnesty scheme.the learned advocate submits that they have not given any opportunity of personal hearing at any point of time. there is no reference in the impugned order that the appellant was given any opportunity of personal hearing. as such, the impugned order is set-aside and matter is remanded back to the commissioner (appeals) to decide the case after giving proper opportunity of personal hearing to the appellant. the appeal is allowed by way of remand.

Full Judgment

1. The issue involved in this application is a narrow compass and therefore after granting stay the hearing of the appeal is taken up for disposal. Heard both sides and perused the records.

2. The learned Advocate on behalf of the applicant submits that the Commissioner passed the order without giving any opportunity of personal hearing.

3. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the records, it is revealed from the impugned order that a show cause notice dated 21.11.2006 was issued by the Commissioner. It appears from the impugned order that the appellant vide reply dated 23.11.2006 received on 24.11.2006 requested to finalise the proceedings under amnesty scheme.

The learned Advocate submits that they have not given any opportunity of personal hearing at any point of time. There is no reference in the impugned order that the appellant was given any opportunity of personal hearing. As such, the impugned order is set-aside and matter is remanded back to the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the case after giving proper opportunity of personal hearing to the appellant. The appeal is allowed by way of remand.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delh... Same Parties Apex Color Lab vs Cce Same Subject Service Tax Same Judge P Das